Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> writes:
> On Mon, 10 Mar 2014, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
>> Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> writes:
>>
>> > It does use the host compiler for me, too.
>> >
>> >> but maybe _that_ is the issue for you? (see also how it uses
>> >> -static-libgcc, for me it doesn't even depend on libgcc_s)
>> >
>> > But as you can see above, libtool, being its usual helpful self, simply
>> > drops -static-libgcc ;-( If I use -Wc,-static-libgcc, all seems fine.
>>
>> The following patch implements this. The override is necessary to avoid
>> LDFLAGS passed in from the toplevel to replace the Makefile value.
>>
>> Bootstraps on i386-pc-solaris2.10 and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu are now
>> well beyond stage1. Ok for mainline if they pass?
>
> If we go that route I wonder if we should rely on the toplevel passing
> -static-libgcc but instead force -static-libgcc for the plugin
> anyway? (conditional on compiling with GCC, of course)
That would mean either duplicating the test from the toplevel or adding
a test for gcc in lto-plugin. Either is ugly, so I'd like to avoid it
if possible.
It occured to me that some of the complexcity would go away if gcc just
accepted and stripped -Wc (which is currently a libtool-only option),
but even if so we'd have to deal with gcc's that don't have this for a
long time.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
